Nice to see some actual testing done on this. To me these don't seem that much more dangerous than normal paintballs, just some additional surface cuts and nothing to get seriously worried about. However I do think that some pre-scoring would be nice if they managed to do it in a way that didn't degrade performance too severely.

"Just remember kiddies: Cheaters don't just suck, they also swallow too!"-Tyger"A Player's Personal Preference is what determines what he/she wants on a Marker, not what other people think that the Player should have on the marker." EvilFingersSupport Grassroots

Great vids! A definitive First Strike test!
Seeing those tests, I would have no problem playing a game against someone using the rounds. And I wear a T-shirt most of the time. That's just me though.

Those sharp edges do look nasty, and given the right conditions could result in a cut that you wouldn't see with a paintball. Most fields I've played at only allow 280 fps max velocity, that should reduce the risk even more.

300 fps is a good test platform because markers use co2 and hpa and can spike to different levels. 300 fps is what is considered a safe level and the fields lower the rate to 280 fps for a measure of safety.

I see a big difference in the comparison. Like the comment that you didn't feel safe shooting at a person closer then fifty feet....I still believe that damage/injury will happen at close ranges depending on where shot and what angles.

They would have to re-package the rounds if pre-scoring as the rounds are breaking/splitting during shipment already...

I agree w/ your conclusion that FS rounds should be regulated to a lower max velocity. Good for safety, minimal impact on performance.

Also The mask test, while representative, is not valid. As you pointed out it has inconsistent velocity problems as well as an old lens will have inconsistencies. There may have been a small crack started after the very first shot but didn't propagate until that specific shot. A better way would be a pressure plate that would record a max force, of course that will be difficult and expensive to get one to work on small "quick" forces.

I think the mask test represents what you will find on the field from time to time including rental masks that get abused more the the everyday player....

I have only shot three FSRs at a brand new mask from thirty feet....It scratches the mask when shot at a glancing hit...The paintballs didn't...When I get more rounds I'll do a two to five foot test on a new mask...

First strike round on bare skin at 50 feet showed slightly worse damage than a paintball. But that's obviously going to be the case since the FS round is going faster at 50 ft than a paintball, and doesn't show that the round is inherently more dangerous.

First strike round on bare skin at 50 feet showed slightly worse damage than a paintball. But that's obviously going to be the case since the FS round is going faster at 50 ft than a paintball, and doesn't show that the round is inherently more dangerous.

Try it a 10 feet ....let me know how it feels....

Honestly....show me some tests...I'm not going to do it...No one on my team will...They all think it's dangerous at close ranges.

Once we get a ranged chrono test of the FS rounds, we'll have an idea of what velocity they're going at compared to paintballs. Then they could be adjusted accordingly to strike at the same speed at a distance. I wouldn't jump right in to a point blank shot with these without doing that first.

Maybe even shooting at point blank on bare skin at increasing velocities. Say start with a 300 fps paintball shot. Then start at 150 fps with the FS and work up in 30 fps increments until damage looks similar. That may show the max safe velocity to compare them to paintballs. Velocity drop at point blank should minimal and they should be similar. We would just have to find someone willing to go through a potential 7 shots at point blank.

I do think there is more to be done with the safety testing but at least we're headed in the right direction.

EDIT: Let's not forget the point blank ballistics gel shots. From what we saw at 300 fps, the FS had deeper craters than paintballs. So that may imply they are slightly more dangerous at equivalent speeds and may necessitate a lower field velocity.

Yeah I was thinking about the ballistics gelatin tests, but it's hard to tell how they correlate to a flesh wound. I understand it has the same consistency as flesh on average, but it seems obvious that skin is much tougher, since even the paintball penetrated some ammount and I've never seen anything like that from a point blank paintball shot.

Even if flesh is tougher, the gel tests should give an indication of which is going to hit harder and/or dig deeper. I would expect to see a similar correlation with flesh at a point blank shot, too. But we won't know for certain until we can see those shots on a person.

Once we get a ranged chrono test of the FS rounds, we'll have an idea of what velocity they're going at compared to paintballs. Then they could be adjusted accordingly to strike at the same speed at a distance. I wouldn't jump right in to a point blank shot with these without doing that first.

yeah, I think this is important to keep in mind - it's entirely possible that the first strike round was traveling 30-50% faster at 50 feet than the paintball. It could effectively move the damage done in a bunkering type situation out to 25, 50 or even 75 feet.

We know the deceleration rate of a paintball - once we have the same information for the first strike round we can make a good comparison.

yeah, I think this is important to keep in mind - it's entirely possible that the first strike round was traveling 30-50% faster at 50 feet than the paintball. It could effectively move the damage done in a bunkering type situation out to 25, 50 or even 75 feet.

That seems like a reasonable conclusion to me. But I still don't think these things are necessarily dangerous so much as not quite as safe. Sure these things can leave some nasty looking surface wounds but even at close range I'd be more worried about getting overshot by somebody who's ramp happy. Not to mention the potential injuries we already deal with on the field, like turning an ankle while you're running, impaling yourself on branches, losing an eye because your mask falls off mid firefight, stepping in a hole while running full tilt, really the list goes on.

That being said, one good solution to this might be limiting the distance in which you can use FS rounds. An old roommate of mine was a big airsofter and they did something like this at his home field with the crazy ass sniper rifles the were using. Basically, you'd have to use something aside from your sniper rifle if you were shooting at somebody less than 100 feet away. Something like a 50-75 foot minimum engagement distance with the FS rounds might be wise.

"Just remember kiddies: Cheaters don't just suck, they also swallow too!"-Tyger"A Player's Personal Preference is what determines what he/she wants on a Marker, not what other people think that the Player should have on the marker." EvilFingersSupport Grassroots

I think any round should be considered for all ranges and wouldn't be limited to their distance being used. That being said, I think these rounds are pretty scary as a drop-in round. Using a regular setup, I think they have potential to cause more harm by simply dropping them in than a regular paintball. How much more harm? Let's just say that Reeko required his bandages to be changed a couple of times. I don't mind bleeding from paintball but if first aid is required to prevent blood loss, then I have a problem with the rounds. Reeko soaked through a couple of gauze bandages before he stopped bleeding. That's more than any paintball wound that either of us have either experienced.

However, I think there is room for improvement on these rounds and they can eventually be accepted mainstream. I think the design itself and/or the velocity they are used at needs to be examined further. Once that is done, then we can safely assume that they can be used anywhere and by anyone.

I think naysayers like Druid are right up to a point but there is room for improvement. I just hope that Tiberius takes these concerns into consideration and uses them to tweak their rounds to our benefit. Once they make them as safe as paintballs, then I think they will wholeheartedly be accepted by the industry.

Reeko soaked through a couple of gauze bandages before he stopped bleeding.

Was this from the head wound?

"Just remember kiddies: Cheaters don't just suck, they also swallow too!"-Tyger"A Player's Personal Preference is what determines what he/she wants on a Marker, not what other people think that the Player should have on the marker." EvilFingersSupport Grassroots

Reeko soaked through a couple of gauze bandages before he stopped bleeding.

Was this from the head wound?

No, that was his back wound. We didn't even realize he had bleeding on his head until days later. His back was our main concern. If we were at a field, we definitely would have made use of my first aid kit that I always take with me.

Reeko soaked through a couple of gauze bandages before he stopped bleeding.

Was this from the head wound?

No, that was his back wound. We didn't even realize he had bleeding on his head until days later. His back was our main concern. If we were at a field, we definitely would have made use of my first aid kit that I always take with me.

what i think should happen is before eatch game who ever has a t9 or t8 with these rounds should sing in or something like that and the field owner walk over and have him/her crono the gun so we all know its safe!!!!!! (sorry for the spelling)

First strike round on bare skin at 50 feet showed slightly worse damage than a paintball. But that's obviously going to be the case since the FS round is going faster at 50 ft than a paintball, and doesn't show that the round is inherently more dangerous.

Try it a 10 feet ....let me know how it feels....

Honestly....show me some tests...I'm not going to do it...No one on my team will...They all think it's dangerous at close ranges.

Who is going to waste or bunker someone with a FS round anyways. Granted there will be those rare cases where you have your FS gun out and someone sneaks up on you but...

I watched all those videos, very good. The ballistics gel was the most interesting aspect to me. The very first standard paintball shot you took, the traditional "ring" shaped impact score was clearly visible as is on skin after a break. This tells me that ballistics gel, for paintball purposes is a reasonable indicator of how a skin impact would be.

Moreover when Bryce tested the rounds, the fins stuck to his plywood which was a holy shit moment...

So tempted to suspend Kitty just so I can say I have....Okay, fuck it....I just banned Kitty, that's going in the sig.

we're going to do the chrono at range test - we already have the deceleration profile for the paintballs - so we should be able to get a good comparison with the FS rounds. That should give us a good idea about what sort of velocity differences we're looking at at middle ranges.

and yes, 7/8 of the skirts were intact after impact with plywood. They're very tough little guys. they were adhered with paint - not embedded - but did survive the impact at 75 feet.

I don't understand why everyone is worried about getting hit at close ranges with the FS round. At 5 feet, both the FS round and the paintball will be going at about 280, or whatever you chrono at. The FS round might be going just a little bit faster, but not significantly so, because there hasn't been enough air time for the difference to become apparent. Essentially at close ranges the same amount of kinetic energy will be transferred, regardless of what you're using. What really makes the difference at that range is the skirt of the FS round, and the incomplete breakage of the shell. That is what needs to be fixed in order for this round to be safer.

That's why people are worried. They don't break apart like they should and that makes them less safe. A 50 ft wound is bad enough, let alone 5 ft. The speed isn't so much the issue as its ability to cut.

I'm interested in what Tiberius plans on doing (if anything) to help the rounds break easier. I think they can do it but it's going to take some fine tuning, time, and most importantly in-house testing before they get it right. I still see a bright future for these rounds but changes do need to be made.

Well, the reason why paintballs are assumed safe at close distances is that they are frangible. Nearly the entirety of the shell breaks upon impact. This is not so with the skirts for the Tib rounds. I think this is mitigated some by the shape of the round in the idea that the front of the round is a dome to which the very crown will act as a crumple zone but it doesn't extert as much force on the outter rim of the fins.

So tempted to suspend Kitty just so I can say I have....Okay, fuck it....I just banned Kitty, that's going in the sig.

Spitle, do you think that perforations in the skirt and/or back plate would help the rounds break apart easier? Assuming that gelatin would have similar effects and would require a redesign of the shape itself, do you think this would be a possible solution? I think that a weak point purposely created just above the back plate would get rid of any jagged edges. The skirt might stay intact but I think the damage caused by it would be lessened since the force is spread out over a larger area.

I think some manner of scoring of the underside of the shell coupled with perforations may increase the likely hood of of the fins disintegrating on impact. I don't really know if there is a viable way to test this because you have to look at two factors:

1.) The skirts need to be fairly rigid no matter what you do.
2.) You cannot score the back too much as the power pulse of the air may rupture the back upon firing.

So tempted to suspend Kitty just so I can say I have....Okay, fuck it....I just banned Kitty, that's going in the sig.

1.) The skirts need to be fairly rigid no matter what you do.2.) You cannot score the back too much as the power pulse of the air may rupture the back upon firing.

...and you want the FS round to break at the apex so the intended target is marked, not near the fins where some of the paint may not get on your target.

I'm wondering if they extended the groves in the tail onto the main section of the round to the apex, if that would cause a splintering effect on impact and allow the cracks in the shell to propagate all the way down the weak grooves straight through the tail section.

I'm wondering if they extended the groves in the tail onto the main section of the round to the apex, if that would cause a splintering effect on impact and allow the cracks in the shell to propagate all the way down the weak grooves straight through the tail section.

I believe the way they are manufactured, that the rounds come in two separate sections, the fins and the dome paint reservoir. Then they are essentially mated and melted together while the paint fill is inserted.

So tempted to suspend Kitty just so I can say I have....Okay, fuck it....I just banned Kitty, that's going in the sig.

No, that was his back wound. We didn't even realize he had bleeding on his head until days later. His back was our main concern. If we were at a field, we definitely would have made use of my first aid kit that I always take with me.

Ok, that's actually kinda surprising. Just to make sure I'm absolutely clear on this, this was the shirt off test right?

What really makes the difference at that range is the skirt of the FS round, and the incomplete breakage of the shell. That is what needs to be fixed in order for this round to be safer.

That's what everyone is worried about at the moment.

I'm going to say that these rounds need a redesign, but a minimum engagement distance (say, no less than 75 feet) is going to be the best solution until that takes place. That way these rounds will still be able to be used enough to generate interest and hopefully reduce the safety concerns. Another thing you might consider is to require that players keep some form of covering on themselves while playing, nothing less than a long sleeve shirt or something like that.

"Just remember kiddies: Cheaters don't just suck, they also swallow too!"-Tyger"A Player's Personal Preference is what determines what he/she wants on a Marker, not what other people think that the Player should have on the marker." EvilFingersSupport Grassroots

Ok, that's actually kinda surprising. Just to make sure I'm absolutely clear on this, this was the shirt off test right?

Yes, that was the bare skin on his back that was shot that caused the most damage. I think the hair on his head provided a buffer and reduced the damage. Not quite as a effect as a shirt or jersey but it did help.

That's what everyone is worried about at the moment.

I'm going to say that these rounds need a redesign, but a minimum engagement distance (say, no less than 75 feet) is going to be the best solution until that takes place. That way these rounds will still be able to be used enough to generate interest and hopefully reduce the safety concerns. Another thing you might consider is to require that players keep some form of covering on themselves while playing, nothing less than a long sleeve shirt or something like that.

Although it's a good idea, I think it would be hard to enforce unless they had sniping games where you're not allowed to cross certain parts of the field to keep people at distance.

Hmm, I wonder if that would make things better or worse. If the speed is reduced, wouldn't that mean that less of the shell would be breaking apart? It seems like those jagged edges depended more on the hardness of the target than the speed. Then again, they wouldn't be pushing into your skin as hard either. So that could go either way. That might be something worth looking into further.

I'd be most worried about my hands and neck. Lucky for me, my BDU jacket has some good neck coverage but my hands are exposed and I have veins that pop up pretty easily. Medical staff have no problem getting an IV in through my hands. I'd hate for one of those veins to get cut on the field. I'll have to get some open tip gloves.

I think any round should be considered for all ranges and wouldn't be limited to their distance being used. That being said, I think these rounds are pretty scary as a drop-in round. Using a regular setup, I think they have potential to cause more harm by simply dropping them in than a regular paintball. How much more harm? Let's just say that Reeko required his bandages to be changed a couple of times. I don't mind bleeding from paintball but if first aid is required to prevent blood loss, then I have a problem with the rounds. Reeko soaked through a couple of gauze bandages before he stopped bleeding. That's more than any paintball wound that either of us have either experienced.

However, I think there is room for improvement on these rounds and they can eventually be accepted mainstream. I think the design itself and/or the velocity they are used at needs to be examined further. Once that is done, then we can safely assume that they can be used anywhere and by anyone.

I think naysayers like Druid are right up to a point but there is room for improvement. I just hope that Tiberius takes these concerns into consideration and uses them to tweak their rounds to our benefit. Once they make them as safe as paintballs, then I think they will wholeheartedly be accepted by the industry.

When dressing a wound you are supposed to put the new layer of gause above the soaked layer, or a least that is what i was taught at a lfeguadring/first aid course but idk u might have medical training.

When dressing a wound you are supposed to put the new layer of gause above the soaked layer, or a least that is what i was taught at a lfeguadring/first aid course but idk u might have medical training.

You would probably know more about that than I would. I have no medical training whatsoever for bleeding. I'll have to look into that for future reference. You're probably right.

All I know is that fingers bleed when they get shot with a standard round - at distance. So if you got shot in the finger, however improbable you might be a little pissed off that you are bleeding all over your marker.

Also when it comes to getting shot in the neck, a blow to the adam's apple would not be on my list of places to get shot.

So tempted to suspend Kitty just so I can say I have....Okay, fuck it....I just banned Kitty, that's going in the sig.

What about TA using a softer plastic and using foam inserts so the keep their shape during storage and shipping...Remove the foam insert before using...Just a thought...

If the rounds are made in two steps with the dome being joined to the skirt, it might be possible to make the dome a softer material while keeping the skirt strong. Or possibly even make the joint thinner so that they want to separate easier.

OK, someone beat us to the dual chrono test - and the results are interesting.

DUrtyDan on SO did this work.

So, at 25 yards the FS is still doing 240 fps while the paintball is at only 180 fps. taking our range test into account - at 50' the paintball is doing just over 200 fps - and I'm going to guess the first strike is going to be closer to 260. That's a huge difference.

basically the first strike take bunkering velocities out to 50 feet or so.

We'll do the dual chrono test at various ranges - that should give us a curve where we can plot the estimated speed at any range.

Are you guys planning on doing the same distances with paintballs, as well, for comparison or are you going to go off of your previous ranged chrono data?

I'd most interested in finding out what paintballs chrono at 10 ft and then finding the equivalent distance for FS rounds. To me, that would be the max velocity that fields would allow them at if the damage they inflict turns out to be the same.

Are you guys planning on doing the same distances with paintballs, as well, for comparison or are you going to go off of your previous ranged chrono data?

I'd most interested in finding out what paintballs chrono at 10 ft and then finding the equivalent distance for FS rounds. To me, that would be the max velocity that fields would allow them at if the damage they inflict turns out to be the same.

yeah, 10, 15 and 20 are common required surrender distances at various fields. the equivalent FS distance would be a good comparison.

I did the velocity range comparisons mentioned above, and would like to comment on the data. The velocity data shown is for the same ball/shot measured at the muzzle and at 25 yards. There would have been more, but it took about 2-3 shots to get one to register at the 25 yard mark under field conditions. The 50 yard was pure random if the chrony would catch it. The consistancy of the data surprised me, and and represent all the gathered measurements, not doctored in any way. I was using a large-bore barrel (about .695), and CO2 on a remote tank. Both the first strike and spherical paint were a very consistant .690.

It is harder than it sounds, getting the ball to cross two chronographs spread that far apart. I was using a break-beam style chrony for the ranged data, and a radar style for the muzzle data. If I wanted to blow $300 doing this, I move the chrono in 50 foot increments and test the terminal velocity for each to 100 yards (300'). I wouldn't assume that there is a correct mathmatical model that would be worth using without having real data to compare with. Shooting 30 or so rounds at each range would also get a better idea of real drop in the rounds. That part would be comparatively easy. But for this to have any relevance, it would have to be done for regular paint as well, and that would take a lot of patience. I could see going through a pod to get one to actually register on a chronograph beyond 50 yards.

I did the velocity range comparisons mentioned above, and would like to comment on the data. The velocity data shown is for the same ball/shot measured at the muzzle and at 25 yards. There would have been more, but it took about 2-3 shots to get one to register at the 25 yard mark under field conditions. The 50 yard was pure random if the chrony would catch it. The consistancy of the data surprised me, and and represent all the gathered measurements, not doctored in any way. I was using a large-bore barrel (about .695), and CO2 on a remote tank. Both the first strike and spherical paint were a very consistant .690.

It is harder than it sounds, getting the ball to cross two chronographs spread that far apart. I was using a break-beam style chrony for the ranged data, and a radar style for the muzzle data. If I wanted to blow $300 doing this, I move the chrono in 50 foot increments and test the terminal velocity for each to 100 yards (300'). I wouldn't assume that there is a correct mathmatical model that would be worth using without having real data to compare with. Shooting 30 or so rounds at each range would also get a better idea of real drop in the rounds. That part would be comparatively easy. But for this to have any relevance, it would have to be done for regular paint as well, and that would take a lot of patience. I could see going through a pod to get one to actually register on a chronograph beyond 50 yards.

Hi, Boomer. Firstly, thank you for doing the ranged chrono test and giving such useful information.

Did you have as hard of a time with the shots tripping the 2nd chrono with the FS rounds as you did with the paintballs? Or did the extra accuracy not make it a problem at all?